Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep;29(9):2569-75.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3969-9. Epub 2014 Dec 6.

Preoperative endoscopy localization error rate in patients with colorectal cancer

Affiliations

Preoperative endoscopy localization error rate in patients with colorectal cancer

Fady Saleh et al. Surg Endosc. 2015 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Preoperative repeat endoscopy in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients is considered by many to be an integral component of surgical planning. Little is known, however, about the utility of re-endoscopy.

Methods: A retrospective review of 342 consecutive patients undergoing elective surgical resection for CRC from January 2008 to December 2011 was performed. Patients were included if the initial endoscopist was different than the operating surgeon. A localization error was recorded if the final tumor location identified during surgery was in a different anatomical segment than that identified by endoscopy. The Chi-squared test was used to compare categorical variables. An error rate with a 95% confidence interval was obtained using the exact binomial distribution.

Results: 298 patients were identified, 118 (39.6%) of whom also underwent a preoperative re-endoscopy by the operating surgeon or partner. Nineteen patients had incorrect tumor localization at initial endoscopy, equivalent to a 6.4% error rate (95% CI 3.88-9.78). In comparison, there were two localization errors on re-endoscopy, 1.69% (95% CI 0.21-6.00). Re-endoscopy was found to be protective against localization errors (P < 0.05), correcting 10 of the 12 errors made at the initial endoscopy. The sensitivity of re-endoscopy as a diagnostic tool to detect errors was 83% with a corresponding specificity of 100%. The overall accuracy of re-endoscopy in preventing endoscopic localization errors was 92% (95% CI 81-100).

Conclusions: There is a small but important localization error rate in preoperative endoscopic evaluation of colorectal tumors. Re-endoscopy appears to be safe and may potentially identify and correct these errors and help with preoperative planning at the expense of delaying surgery. Further research is necessary to find ways to improve localization and identify which patients would benefit from re-endoscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Lancet Oncol. 2005 Jul;6(7):477-84 - PubMed
    1. Can J Surg. 2009 Aug;52(4):E79-E86 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 13;350(20):2050-9 - PubMed
    1. Surg Endosc. 2014 Oct;28(10):2808-14 - PubMed
    1. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 Jan 27;2(1):22-5 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources